7.6 GigaFLOPS - How about you?



  • Reply 21 of 122
    jerombajeromba Posts: 357member
    On a Dual 800 with 10.1.2 i've got 5443.3 MegaFlops in 2.4 sec.

    Not bad ?
  • Reply 22 of 122
    mithrasmithras Posts: 165member
    I'm very curious to see someone's results with a TiBook G4.

    I'm still running on my old "top of the line" Powerbook G3/300 (176 MFLOPS). The wifey is using an iBook 600 (370 MFLOPS). This is all under 10.1.

    I'm soon going to grad school, where I'll be running lots of computationally intensive scientific apps (Stata, Mathematica, etc.) I'll get a new computer when I go. I've always liked having a notebook; but if the desktops kick so much butt on DP-enabled, AltiVec-enabled code, I might have to reconsider.

    So can someone kindly try this on a TiBook, to compare a reasonably-speedy TiBook G4 to the seriously-speedy DP towers?

    [ 02-01-2002: Message edited by: Mithras ]</p>
  • Reply 23 of 122
    krassykrassy Posts: 595member
    G4/400Mhz AGP 448MB Ram 1275 MFLOPS
  • Reply 24 of 122
    I got 8123 megaflops on my dual 1 gig, the first scores were in the 7800 range, thats damn good, my dual 450 showed 3026 megaflops. 8123 rocks the house.
  • Reply 25 of 122
    crusadercrusader Posts: 1,129member
    125.4 Megaflops in 113.6 seconds

    iMac 233 (Rev a) OS 9.
  • Reply 26 of 122
    pepsipepsi Posts: 55member
    My Dual 450 got 3376.5 Mflops in 6.8 seconds...
  • Reply 27 of 122
  • Reply 28 of 122
    Any PowerBooks out there?
  • Reply 29 of 122
    As more of you get your new iMacs, feel free to post results in this thread.

    I'm very interested to see how a 800MHz G4 with no L3 cache and on a 100MHz bus does at this benchmark.
  • Reply 30 of 122
    867 w/ 384MB and os 10.1.2

    altivec on: 3209.9MFLOPS

    altivec off: 455.2 MFLOPS


    so altivec /can/ make a difference
  • Reply 31 of 122
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    277.7 MF

    tt = touble tost?
  • Reply 32 of 122
    Big bad 157.9 Mflops on my 266 Beige G3
  • Reply 33 of 122
    mikemike Posts: 138member
    [quote]Originally posted by janitor:

    <strong>tt = touble tost? </strong><hr></blockquote>

    No, I had traveled back in time to post some messages and it stands for time trouble
  • Reply 34 of 122
    266mHz PBG3, 10.1.2, 384mb RAM

    158mflops in 90.2 sec. after I quit all apps;

    146mflops in 97.7 sec. after turned off Altivec code;

    145mflops in 98.0 sec. before twiddling anything
  • Reply 35 of 122
    new iMac---4.8 sec with 2777.6 megaflops....so almost exactly half of a dual 800....


    On a Dual 800 with 10.1.2 i've got 5443.3 MegaFlops in 2.4 sec <hr></blockquote>
  • Reply 36 of 122
    Cool thread...


    Powermac G4 400 MHz "Sawtooth" motherboard w/ AGP.

    576 MB RAM

    OS X, 10.1.2


    Altivec ON: 1367

    Altivec OFF: 309

    Isn't that Altivec sweet? Wintel users, go put those results in your pipe, and smoke 'em!
  • Reply 37 of 122
    Ok dual 800 on 9.2.2 for a change...

    With One Processor: 4,7 sec / 2845.8 MF

    With Two: 2.3 sec / 5671.7 MF

    Altivec Off (Mono): 33.9 sec / 419.9 MF

    Altivec Off (Dual): 16.9 sec / 844.0 MF
  • Reply 38 of 122
    cosmocosmo Posts: 662member
    anyone using a "Yikes!" G4? specifically a 350. I'm curious as to whether or not all of the g4s that apple has ever produce can surpass one gigaflop.

    also i'm curious if using the older mobo really would make a differance seeing how as it still had 100mhz bus and pc 100 ram.

    for those who are confused the yikes! machines used the same motherboard as the b&w g3s. (if you have a g4 with no agp slot you own a yikes! machine)
  • Reply 39 of 122
    mikemike Posts: 138member
    System: PowerMac G4 Dual 1GHZ, 512mb of ram, OS X 10.1.2

    Results: 6991.1 Megaflops at default settings

    I can tweak it to go higher but the defaul settings seem to be the fair comparison.
  • Reply 40 of 122
    to those who doubt the power of the g4:

    ibook 600 mhz w/ 256 megs of ram.

    system 9.2.1

    419 mflops

    compare that to the earliest g4 tower


    [ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: pismeov ]

    [ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: pismeov ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.